State report on Alamo shocks DRT

Group chief says it doesn't reflect current situation.

Updated 1:05 am, Thursday, November 22, 2012

The Daughters of the Republic of Texas are disputing the findings of a scathing report that outlines faulty management of finances and artifacts at the Alamo, among other problems at the shrine.

DRT President Karen Thompson said Wednesday that the DRT and its lawyer are reviewing the report, which cites the DRT's “inadequate understanding of historic preservation,” and claims the group “failed to prioritize preservation in the Alamo's annual operating budgets.”

The 38-page report to the Legislature was released Tuesday by the Texas attorney general's office.

In a prepared statement, Thompson said it did not account for recent changes in DRT leadership, bylaw revisions, external audits and new financial controls.

The group has a “strong working relationship” with the Texas General Land Office, which assumed custodianship of the Alamo last year.

“It seems that this report, which includes only interviews with disavowed members and former employees, is not accurate of DRT in 2012,” Thompson said.

Without citing specifics, she said the DRT “is shocked at the outrageously inaccurate conclusions” in the report.

Still, she said: “We're going to move forward.”

State Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, who sponsored a 2011 bill that ended the DRT's 106-year run as Alamo custodian, said the Daughters should take the report to heart and be grateful they still provide daily operations under a state contract set to expire in mid-2013.

“They really need to take a hard look internally, and be thankful the Legislature didn't remove their presence at the Alamo,” Van de Putte said.

While the change has been hard for some Daughters to accept, the AG's report reaffirms that the state “did the right thing,” she said.

Van de Putte said she supports the Land Office's request for a one-time, $1 million appropriation for site improvements, including roof repairs at the mission-era Long Barrack. But she said she will be “distressed” if the Land Office does not replace its on-site Alamo director, Steve Oswald, who recently resigned five months on the job.

More Information

• The DRT co-mingled gift shop proceeds for Alamo repair and maintenance with unrestricted state dollars and the group’s own funds.

• The Daughters did not provide timely follow-up to engineers’ reports concerning the Alamo roof, which had leaked since 1997, and failed to prioritize preservation in the shrine’s operating budgets.

• The DRT failed to wage a capital fund-raising campaign or create a suitable business plan for the Alamo, and did not cut costs in the face of decreased 2011 gift shop sales.

• The Daughters improperly sought a trademark on the phrase “The Alamo” without consulting the state, then remained defiant, forcing the state to hire outside counsel at taxpayer expense.

• The DRT board violated bylaws and the Texas Business Organizations Code in entering a $900,000 marketing contract without underwriters in place, then used state funds to pay off debt from the canceled contract.

• More than $56,000 in state funds were used improperly to pay DRT legal fees.

• A lack of training for DRT Alamo Committee members on laws governing employer-employee relationships exposed the DRT to “unnecessary employment litigation risks.”

• The Daughters incorrectly “purported to own” historic relics at the Alamo that, without proper documentation, are assumed to belong to the state.

• The DRT improperly utilized state funds to operate its DRT Library, which is not a state facility.

• Because the Legislature removed the DRT as custodian, the AG’s office agreed not to take legal action in court.

The DRT now runs the Alamo without a regular on-site Land Office employee, although the agency staff is making frequent calls and site visits.

Van de Putte said there has not been enough progress in improving transparency at the Alamo and forming a foundation for preservation fundraising. Records on artifacts are “still in a mess,” fueling disagreement over which of the thousands of items are the DRT's and which belong to the state.

“The Land Office has to maintain a strong hand in operations of the Alamo,” she said. “We've moved very slowly into this new relationship.”

Van de Putte agreed with comments from the Land Office that in spite of the report, the DRT should remain in charge of daily operations, since the group turned the ruins of the former mission and battle site into the state's most popular historic destination, with more than 2.5 million visitors each year.

“But they can't be in charge of finances,” she said.

Tammie Smith, a former DRT board member, said the group has not made changes outlined by the attorney general's office. She said the Land Office, by paying the DRT $10,000 per month to run the Alamo, is serving as the group's “enabler.”

“I believe the general membership should be outraged by the board's behavior and demand their resignations,” as well as dismissal of the group's legal counsel, Smith said.

To heal a “divisive factionalization” among the DRT's 7,000 members, the report recommends the DRT move toward an executive committee of its board that meets monthly; better compliance with information requests from members; and adoption of “modernized bylaws” that are “less susceptible to arbitrary interpretations.”